@heatherdale
That definition might be a bit naive to my understanding.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
@heatherdale
I understand. Just wanted to point out there is much more to socialism than just serving people etc. Also, about health etc.. I live in Spain, where we have public health.That can be a good thing, part of a social democratic view. This approach can also have it´s drawbacks Social democracies can be tricky in some senses like taxes or even lead society to a passive attitude as State is providing essential services and population fears any change that might leave them without them.
@heatherdale This can develop into submission. State must be very controlled in my opinion. Don´t get me wrong, I understand the good part (I live it every day), but I´m not sure about the veneration socialism has for State. Politicians and State sometimes take advantage of this and create Partitocracies (that can develop into an oligarchy democracy like in Spain) and poor representation for the individuals. Every coin has it´s two sides I´d say.
@Uselessdogs
I didn’t read the book but I read the article and I think he’s suggesting the definition of socialism he describes is at the core of all the various socialist efforts to date and the core definition continues to this day and always will. Basically efforts and resources are managed differently, serving people in general rather than the elite few.
Take health care for example, why should it be only for those who can afford it.
I think it’s an interesting perspective.